Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chennai
Babuji Jacob , Chennai vs Ito Non Corporate Ward 1(2) , Chennai on 29 December, 2017
आयकर अपील य अ
धकरण, 'ए' यायपीठ, चे नई
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
' A' BENCH : CHENNAI
ी जॉज माथन, या यक सद
य के सम
एवं ए. मोहन अलंकामणी, लेखा सद
य
BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER &
SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
S.P. No.345/Mds./2017
(I.T.A.No.1922/Mds./2017
नधा रण वष /Assessment year : 2013-14 )
Shri Babuji Jacob, Vs. The Income Tax officer ,
82,Golden Primrose, Non-Corporate Ward -1(2),
32,Saravana Stgreet, Chennai.
T.Nagar,Chennai 600 017.
[PAN AAAPJ 7219 C ]
(अपीलाथ /Appellant) ( यथ /Respondent)
अपीलाथ! क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Mr.S.Sridhar, Advocate
$%यथ! क" ओर से /Respondent by : Mr.AR.V.Sreenivasan, JCIT,D.R
सन
ु वाई क" तार)ख/Date of Hearing : 29 -12-2017
घोषणा क" तार)ख /Date of Pronouncement : 29-12-2017
आदे श / O R D E R
PER GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
This is a Stay Petition filed by the assessee in its appeal in ITA No.1922/Mds./2017.
2. Shri S.Sridhar, Advocate represented on behalf of assessee and Mr.AR.V.Sreenivasan, JCIT represented on behalf of Revenue.
:- 2 -: SP No.345/Mds./2017
3. It was submitted by the ld.A.R that the assessee is in appeal against the penalty levied u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act in respect of long term capital gains assessed on the sale of certain agricultural lands. It was a submission that the total demand was `50 lakhs and the assessee has already paid `10 lakhs. It was a submission that the assessee is hard pressed for funds in so far as the assessee has invested the long term capital gains in the purchase of a residential house. It was a submission that the appeal os assessee is posted for hearing on 02.01.2018. It was a submission that the assessee may be granted stay of recovery of disputed tax.
4. In reply, the ld. Departmental Representative vehemently opposed the Stay Petition. It was a submission that the Ld.CIT(A) has already decided the penalty against the assessee. It was a submission that the Stay Petition is liable to be rejected.
5. We have considered the rival submissions. Without going into merits of the appeal, considering the fact that the issue is in respect of penalty levied u/s.271(1)(c) of the Act and the assessee has paid `10 lakhs out of the demand of `50 lakhs and the appeal is posted for hearing on 02.01.2018, the assessee is granted stay of recovery of the balance of the disputed penalty for a period of two months from today. In the event that the assessee seeks an :- 3 -: SP No.345/Mds./2017 adjournment on 02.01.2018 being the date of hearing of the appeal, this stay granted to the assessee shall stand vacated.
6. In the result, the Stay Petition filed by the assessee stands allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 29th December, 2017, at Chennai.
Sd/- Sd/-
(ए. मोहन अलंकामणी) ( जॉज माथन)
(A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (GEORGE MATHAN)
लेखा सद#य /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER या$यक सद#य/JUDICIAL MEMBER
चे नई/Chennai
-दनांक/Dated: 29th December, 2017.
K S Sundaram
आदे श क" $ त0ल1प अ2े1षत/Copy to:
1. अपीलाथ!/Appellant 3. आयकर आयु3त (अपील)/CIT(A) 5. 1वभागीय $ त न6ध/DR
2. $%यथ!/Respondent 4. आयकर आयु3त/CIT 6. गाड फाईल/GF